DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on January 5th, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed January 5th, 2026 has been entered. Claim 1 has been amended.
The Section 103 rejections over Kim 2020 as the primary reference has been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection has been made further in view of Liao (WO 2020/155736 A1) and optionally Han et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0097197 A1) AND further in view of Wang et al. (U.S. 2021/0165447 A1) and Koyaizu et al. (JP 2000-345373 A).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed January 5th, 2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 11-12, 14, 17-18, 21, 23, & 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/00319672 A1) (hereinafter “Kim”) in view of in view of Zhu et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0295655 A1) (hereinafter “Zhu”) OR Zhang et al. (CN 111640770 A) (hereinafter “Zhang ‘770”) AND Liao (WO 2020/155736 A1) (hereinafter “Liao”) and optionally Han et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0097197 A1) (hereinafter “Han”)
Regarding claims 1, 11, 14, 17-18, 23, and 27-28, Kim 2020 teaches a folding support member, foldable about a folding axis (All Figs. [A]) within the hinge area (All Figs. [h3]) flanked by first and second non-folding areas (All Figs. [h1/h2]), the support member comprising a metal (first) layer (All Figs. [450]), polymer (second) member (All Figs. [440]), and an adhesive (third) layer (All Figs. [P3]) disposed between and bonding the first metal and polymer layers, wherein the metal layer comprises at least one of copper (Cu), aluminum (Al), stainless steel (SUS), or clad such as a stacking member of SUS (first-first layer) and Al (first-second layer) alternately disposed and comprising a plurality of through holes in the hinge area, the holes having linear sidewalls (Fig. 7F).
However, the support layer holes are not taught to have first portion within the first-first layer having a curved inner surface and having a width that gradually decreases along a vertical direction toward the first-second layer and a second portion within the first-second layer having a curved inner surface and having a width that gradually decreases along a vertical direction toward the first-first layer such that a minimum width is at the interface between the first-first layer and the first-second layer and a maximum width at a first surface and/or second surface of the support layer.
Zhu teaches a support member for a foldable display, wherein a bilayer (Fig. 7) stacked/clad metal member is improved over that of a single metal material [0004-0005, 0069], wherein stainless steel has a high rigidity and strength, good weldability, easy formability but is not great for heat dissipation and heavier in weight, copper has a good heat dissipation capability and is easy to form but has poor welding performance and high weight, and aluminum has a good heat dissipation and a light weight and is easy to form but has poor rigidity, low strength, and poor welding performance [0062-0064], wherein an exemplary embodiment comprises an atom bonded [0012, 0046-0049] first layer configured for heat dissipation and a second layer configured for support that are stacked, wherein a first layer is greater in elastic modulus (yield strength) and lesser in thermal conductivity than the second layer, such as stainless steel and aluminum or copper [0070-0076], wherein while the thickness ratio may not be limited having a broad range of 0.2 to 0.91, the most balanced properties are derived from about 0.3-0.7 as set forth in Table 1 [0078-0081].
OR
Zhang ‘770 teaches a foldable display comprising a stacked/clad support [0006-0007], wherein a bilayer embodiment (Fig. 3) comprises a first structural layer of steel and a second structural layer of copper or aluminum [0009] in a thickness ratio of 2:1 to 1:5 (0.2~0.8) [0011], wherein the second layer is more likely to deform than the first having higher rigidity/stiffness and the second being higher in toughness being of different elastic moduli [0035, 0052].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a clad/stacked bilayer metal layer, wherein an interface position has an overlapping range with that of the minimum width. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide a balance in properties of strength and conductivity over that of a single metal layer [Zhu] OR to allow for the support to provide both toughness and strength for the stress generated during the bending or recovery process [Zhang ‘770].
Liao teaches a metallic support sheet for a foldable terminal having holes/gaps therethrough, the gaps comprising any cross-sectional shape [0014], wherein the inner wall of the hole can be linear/a plane allowing for equal bending arcs in both directions [0015, 0110, 0111] or the wall can be arc-shaped (Fig. 5d) having a minimum diameter at about the midplane/center thickness of the support, wherein a larger opening at the surface allows an increase in stress absorption [0112].
Furthermore, Han teaches a display device back cover (support) as comprising a plurality of through openings having a double-trapezoidal/hourglass-like shape (Fig. 15B), wherein a singular-trapezoidal structure extending through a layer is designed for balancing compressive and tensile stresses alternately acting above and below the neutral plane for folding/bending in a single direction [0083], wherein it can be concluded that the double-trapezoidal shape would have resulted in a balance of stresses for folding/bending in both directions placing the neutral plane at the center of the layer, further corroborating the findings of Liao.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide the clad/stacked bilayer metal layer with openings having arc-shape inner walls forming the first and second portions as claimed such that the minimum width would inherently [Liao] or obviously be at the interface of the clad/stacked bilayer metal layer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to design the inner surface of each of a plurality of through holes that allows for equal bending arcs in both directions while simultaneously allowing for increased stress absorption [Liao] inherently placing the minimum width at the interface, optionally obviously centering of the neutral plane at the interface [Han], the interface being a potential point of failure in a bilayer structure.
Further regarding claims 11-12, 14, 21, a polymer (second) layer (Fig. 14A [443]) can be thinner than an adhesive (third) layer (Fig. 14A [552]), which is smaller than the metal (third) layer (Fig. 14A [450]), wherein while a percentage range/value in relation to thickness is not taught, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions and the prior art device would not perform different than the claimed device, the claimed device is not patentably different. See MPEP 2144.04 IV. A.
Further regarding claim 23, an adhesive layer that bonds the same layers as set forth above should inherently comprise a similar/same tan delta within or near the claimed range.
Further regarding claims 27-28, a protective member may be further located on the back (All Figs. [P4]) and an adhesive member (All Figs. [P2]) connecting the foldable support to the display panel (All Figs. [430]) [0082].
Claims 11-12, 14-16, 21, & 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim 2020 in view of Zhu or Zhang, Liao, and optionally Han, as applied to claim 1 above, even further in view of Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0208636 A1) (hereinafter “Kim 2021”) and Ha et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0061972 A1) (hereinafter “Ha”).
Regarding claims 11-12, 14-16, 21, and 24, (in the event that) a polyimide/plastic meeting the claimed conditions is not taught.
Kim 2021 evidences/teaches a foldable display device comprising an adhesive layer that directly adheres to a lower, supporting metal layer including within its holes therein, only having a reduced adhesive force in places not contacting the metal layer or the opposing adherend [0019-020, 0094] and the adhesive layer comprises a modulus of about 0.001 to about 0.250 MPa (1 kPa to 250 kPa) such that it can easily be filled into the holes in the metal layer [0073], such that permeation by external foreign particles can be prevented by the filled adhesive layer that also adheres to the layer thereabove, improving the reliability and flexibility of the device [0095].
However, particular layer thicknesses are not taught.
Ha teaches a foldable display device comprising a lower, supporting metal layer having an elastic modulus, having at least one additional layer adhered thereto by an adhesive/polymer layer [0055, 0060-0063, 0068, 0083-0084], wherein the adhesive force on an upper side is about 1000 gf/inch and on a lower side being 800 gf/inch, such that exfoliation from the metal layer during folding does not occur [0063, 0068], wherein the polymer layer preferably is a polyimide [0008], which is adhered to a metal layer via an adhesive layer in a thickness ratio of 1:1 to 1:5 [0066] and the metal layer having a thickness ratio of less than 1:3. However, as applied to the thicker perforated metal layer as recited above, and the adhesive layer at least partially filling the holes, the thickness ranges should be within or closer to the ranges as claimed.
Claims 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim 2020 in view of Zhu or Zhang, Liao, and optionally Han, as applied to claim 1 above, even further in view of Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0208636 A1) (hereinafter “Kim 2021”).
Regarding claims 25-26, filling the holes with adhesive is not taught by Kim 2020.
Kim 2021 evidences/teaches a foldable display device comprising an adhesive layer that directly adheres to a lower, supporting metal layer including within its holes therein, only having a reduced adhesive force in places not contacting the metal layer or the opposing adherend [0019-020, 0094] and the adhesive layer comprises a modulus of about 0.001 to about 0.250 MPa (1 kPa to 250 kPa) such that it can easily be filled into the holes in the metal layer [0073], such that permeation by external foreign particles can be prevented by the filled adhesive layer that also adheres to the layer thereabove, improving the reliability and flexibility of the device [0095].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide the metal layer bonded to the layer thereabove via an adhesive layer that at least partially fills the holes. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to prevent permeation by external foreign particles that also adheres to the layer thereabove, improving the reliability and flexibility of the device [Kim 2021].
Claims 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim 2020 in view of Zhu or Zhang, Liao, and optionally Han, as applied to claim 1 above, even further in view of Jang et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2017/0153668 A1) (hereinafter “Jang”).
Regarding claims 27-28, in the event a protective layer is not taught as recited above:
Jang teaches foldable display device comprising at least one impact absorption layer below an elastic modulus containing back plate [0060, 0063], wherein providing the impact absorption film under the backplate reduces the damage to the display and/or touch panel [0074].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a foldable backplate with a protective layer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide a lower layer to balance the modulus properties imparted by a first/skin layer, working together to protect the metal layer [Ha; 0075, 0079] or to provide additional impact absorption below the back plate/support layers [Jang; 0074].
Claims 1, 11-12, 14, 17-18, 21, 23, & 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/00319672 A1) (hereinafter “Kim”) in view of in view of Zhu et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0295655 A1) (hereinafter “Zhu”) OR Zhang et al. (CN 111640770 A) (hereinafter “Zhang ‘770”) AND Wang et al. (U.S. 2021/0165447 A1) (hereinafter “Wang”) and optionally evidenced by or in view Koyaizu et al. (JP 2000-345373 A) (hereinafter “Koyaizu”).
Regarding claims 1, 11, 14, 17-18, 23, and 27-28, Kim 2020 teaches a folding support member, foldable about a folding axis (All Figs. [A]) within the hinge area (All Figs. [h3]) flanked by first and second non-folding areas (All Figs. [h1/h2]), the support member comprising a metal (first) layer (All Figs. [450]), polymer (second) member (All Figs. [440]), and an adhesive (third) layer (All Figs. [P3]) disposed between and bonding the first metal and polymer layers, wherein the metal layer comprises at least one of copper (Cu), aluminum (Al), stainless steel (SUS), or clad such as a stacking member of SUS (first-first layer) and Al (first-second layer) alternately disposed and comprising a plurality of through holes in the hinge area, the holes having linear sidewalls (Fig. 7F).
However, the support layer holes are not taught to have first portion within the first-first layer having a curved inner surface and having a width that gradually decreases along a vertical direction toward the first-second layer and a second portion within the first-second layer having a curved inner surface and having a width that gradually decreases along a vertical direction toward the first-first layer such that a minimum width is at the interface between the first-first layer and the first-second layer and a maximum width at a first surface and/or second surface of the support layer.
Zhu teaches a support member for a foldable display, wherein a bilayer (Fig. 7) stacked/clad metal member is improved over that of a single metal material [0004-0005, 0069], wherein stainless steel has a high rigidity and strength, good weldability, easy formability but is not great for heat dissipation and heavier in weight, copper has a good heat dissipation capability and is easy to form but has poor welding performance and high weight, and aluminum has a good heat dissipation and a light weight and is easy to form but has poor rigidity, low strength, and poor welding performance [0062-0064], wherein an exemplary embodiment comprises an atom bonded [0012, 0046-0049] first layer configured for heat dissipation and a second layer configured for support that are stacked, wherein a first layer is greater in elastic modulus (yield strength) and lesser in thermal conductivity than the second layer, such as stainless steel and aluminum or copper [0070-0076], wherein while the thickness ratio may not be limited having a broad range of 0.2 to 0.91, the most balanced properties are derived from about 0.3-0.7 as set forth in Table 1 [0078-0081].
OR
Zhang ‘770 teaches a foldable display comprising a stacked/clad support [0006-0007], wherein a bilayer embodiment (Fig. 3) comprises a first structural layer of steel and a second structural layer of copper or aluminum [0009] in a thickness ratio of 2:1 to 1:5 (0.2~0.8) [0011], wherein the second layer is more likely to deform than the first having higher rigidity/stiffness and the second being higher in toughness being of different elastic moduli [0035, 0052].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a clad/stacked bilayer metal layer, wherein an interface position has an overlapping range with that of the minimum width. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide a balance in properties of strength and conductivity over that of a single metal layer [Zhu] OR to allow for the support to provide both toughness and strength for the stress generated during the bending or recovery process [Zhang ‘770].
Wang teaches a foldable metal support layer in a device, wherein the hole sidewalls are not perpendicular to the metal layer plane enhancing folding/bending performance via stress release at a convex portion [0008, 0015, 0045-0046], wherein holes that are axisymmetric and gradually tapered from both sides so as to be gradually reduced in width with a minimum forming convex portions peaking at a central (neutral) plane (Fig. 6) increasing dispersal of stress would have increased the desired stress release and allowed for further improvement in stress dispersal [0009, 0052-0053], formed by masking and etching steps sequential and alternating from a first side to a second side of the of the metal layer [0070-0071].
Optionally, Koyaizu evidences/teaches a wet etching method of forming uniform holes in a thin metal plate by forming masking and etching steps sequential and alternating from a first side to a second side of the of the metal plate improved over single step etching, which inherently provide gradually curved walls extending from each surface defining a convex portion at the center forming a minimum width.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide the clad/stacked bilayer metal layer with openings having curved surface inner walls forming the first and second portions as claimed such that the minimum width would be at the interface of the clad/stacked bilayer metal layer either inherently or obviously. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to design the inner surface of each of a plurality of through holes, wherein the curved surface convex portion is formed inherently via the two-stage wet etching process as set forth/desired by Wang, which would have allowed for differing etching treatments of the differing metal layers [Koyaizu], further such that stress release/dispersion would have been focused on convex portion at the bilayer interface [Wang], the interface being an obvious point of failure in a bilayer structure.
Further regarding claims 11-12, 14, 21, a polymer (second) layer (Fig. 14A [443]) can be thinner than an adhesive (third) layer (Fig. 14A [552]), which is smaller than the metal (third) layer (Fig. 14A [450]), wherein while a percentage range/value in relation to thickness is not taught, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions and the prior art device would not perform different than the claimed device, the claimed device is not patentably different. See MPEP 2144.04 IV. A.
Further regarding claim 23, an adhesive layer that bonds the same layers as set forth above should inherently comprise a similar/same tan delta within or near the claimed range.
Further regarding claims 27-28, a protective member may be further located on the back (All Figs. [P4]) and an adhesive member (All Figs. [P2]) connecting the foldable support to the display panel (All Figs. [430]) [0082].
Claims 11-12, 14-16, 21, & 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim 2020 in view of Zhu or Zhang, Wang, and optionally Koyaizu, as applied to claim 1 above, even further in view of Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0208636 A1) (hereinafter “Kim 2021”) and Ha et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0061972 A1) (hereinafter “Ha”).
Regarding claims 11-12, 14-16, 21, and 24, (in the event that) a polyimide/plastic meeting the claimed conditions is not taught.
Kim 2021 evidences/teaches a foldable display device comprising an adhesive layer that directly adheres to a lower, supporting metal layer including within its holes therein, only having a reduced adhesive force in places not contacting the metal layer or the opposing adherend [0019-020, 0094] and the adhesive layer comprises a modulus of about 0.001 to about 0.250 MPa (1 kPa to 250 kPa) such that it can easily be filled into the holes in the metal layer [0073], such that permeation by external foreign particles can be prevented by the filled adhesive layer that also adheres to the layer thereabove, improving the reliability and flexibility of the device [0095].
However, particular layer thicknesses are not taught.
Ha teaches a foldable display device comprising a lower, supporting metal layer having an elastic modulus, having at least one additional layer adhered thereto by an adhesive/polymer layer [0055, 0060-0063, 0068, 0083-0084], wherein the adhesive force on an upper side is about 1000 gf/inch and on a lower side being 800 gf/inch, such that exfoliation from the metal layer during folding does not occur [0063, 0068], wherein the polymer layer preferably is a polyimide [0008], which is adhered to a metal layer via an adhesive layer in a thickness ratio of 1:1 to 1:5 [0066] and the metal layer having a thickness ratio of less than 1:3. However, as applied to the thicker perforated metal layer as recited above, and the adhesive layer at least partially filling the holes, the thickness ranges should be within or closer to the ranges as claimed.
Claims 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim 2020 in view of Zhu or Zhang, Wang, and optionally Koyaizu, as applied to claim 1 above, even further in view of Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0208636 A1) (hereinafter “Kim 2021”).
Regarding claims 25-26, filling the holes with adhesive is not taught by Kim 2020.
Kim 2021 evidences/teaches a foldable display device comprising an adhesive layer that directly adheres to a lower, supporting metal layer including within its holes therein, only having a reduced adhesive force in places not contacting the metal layer or the opposing adherend [0019-020, 0094] and the adhesive layer comprises a modulus of about 0.001 to about 0.250 MPa (1 kPa to 250 kPa) such that it can easily be filled into the holes in the metal layer [0073], such that permeation by external foreign particles can be prevented by the filled adhesive layer that also adheres to the layer thereabove, improving the reliability and flexibility of the device [0095].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide the metal layer bonded to the layer thereabove via an adhesive layer that at least partially fills the holes. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to prevent permeation by external foreign particles that also adheres to the layer thereabove, improving the reliability and flexibility of the device [Kim 2021].
Claims 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim 2020 in view of Zhu or Zhang, Wang, and optionally Koyaizu, as applied to claim 1 above, even further in view of Jang et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2017/0153668 A1) (hereinafter “Jang”).
Regarding claims 27-28, in the event a protective layer is not taught as recited above:
Jang teaches foldable display device comprising at least one impact absorption layer below an elastic modulus containing back plate [0060, 0063], wherein providing the impact absorption film under the backplate reduces the damage to the display and/or touch panel [0074].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a foldable backplate with a protective layer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide a lower layer to balance the modulus properties imparted by a first/skin layer, working together to protect the metal layer [Ha; 0075, 0079] or to provide additional impact absorption below the back plate/support layers [Jang; 0074].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure:
Usui et al. (JP 2001-105398 A) teach a process of forming fine holes in a metal substrate, improved upon the process of Koyaizu demonstrated as the conventional method in Fig. 14 [0006], wherein the substrate is laser processed then etched [0016, 0035], which allows for far greater precision, depth, and fineness with increased control of sidewall surface geometry allowing linear or curved sidewalls similar to the prior art [0016, 0043], wherein as applied to a metal substrate the undercut sidewall curvature provided by the isotropic etching process is difficult if not impossible to entirely overcome but can be mitigated, as much as desired, by laser modification prior to etching the through hole [0006, 0039]. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use the conventional process of Wang (evidenced by Koyaizu) or the improved process of Usui to form the desired convex portions having greater precision, depth, and fineness with increased control of sidewall surface geometry.
Park et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0223074 A1), which may or may not be available as prior art, teaches the doubly curved sidewalls through a metal support.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to JEFFREY A VONCH whose telephone number is (571)270-1134. The Examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, Applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Frank J Vineis can be reached at (571)270-1547. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JEFFREY A VONCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781 January 31st, 2026